As much as I like Jimmy Song, that idea about changing bitcoin decimals will not help any new users since if they are too dumb to work with 0.00000000 they definitely are not ready for crypto. On the other end, all it will do is confuse the old timers that are already used to the 8 decimal system and some of them there finally start to getting use to the current system.

If we know something about human is that they don't like change which is why I get a phone call every time facebook change something to their layout from my parents or that people go crazy every time youtube also change something. People need to simply "Learn" and do their due diligence when investing in crypto, if they don't want to do it now, changing stuff won't make it easier for them anyways.

Washed trading….or it's a premium as a result of difficult fiat onramps. On Bithumb for example, why would a majority of the volume take place at the 75 cent level. I don't think they stoped trading with themselves, something else is going on. I trade on Gdax and don't pay fees, is that washed trading or am I missing something?

Expecting others to implement Segwit to improve Bitcoin, is like asking a country to change its roads, instead of building a better car. As a result of such delays, Bitcoin loses market dominance. Well done Bitcoin Core.

Thomas; two things:1. Using the term "bits", as proposed by your friend, Jimmy Song, is not meant to replace their term "Bitcoin" – it is simply meant to make it easier to talk about Bitcoin in smaller units. Most fiat currencies have that already (dollars and cents, Euros and Euro cents, etc). We don't usually talk about naught point zero five dollars when we mean five cents, so why say naught point naught naught naught naught 1 Bitcoin when we mean 10 bits. I have a good math head, but dealing with many decimal places is not natural for humans. 2. Decimal numbers are read number by number. Eg: 3.45 is pronounced "three point four five", not "three point forty five". .45 has nothing to do with forty five. Btw, I enjoy your videos, even though they're a little biased 😉Cheers.

Guy who hates Bitcoin suddenly loves Bitcoin. Miners leaving China could cause a slow down similar to a crash ?. Yet this guy suddenly encourages people to start buying bitcoin ? When someone who hates bitcoin saids they like it now, right before it might have a slow down causing a price drop should I worry ? Will Bitcoin struggle to work when miners leave China ? Could Bitcoin get a competitor if it slows down too much, something more centralized like Litcoin or Bitcoin cash ? Could exchanges start trading using these coins as currency ? Who would want something centralized that they could control for power *sarcasm) ? Bitcoin needs altcoins, Thats the problem with Bitcoin, they focus on just setting up bitcoin like they dont need anyone else. If Bitcoin want their coin to be bigger they need to start thinking about making it more useful. How ? By supporting the market that bitcoin is in. The token and altcoin market. Help Bitcoin users who regularly buy & trade bitcoin by providing wallets, idiot proof wallets, not just to store bitcoin, but also to store altcoins ? People have massive issues getting their altcoins or tokens off of exchanges which in turn reflects back badly on Bitcoin , because it makes people reluctant to get involved in Bitcoin & this market place. Its not just about Bitcoin, Bitcoin is part of an ego system. The best wallet Ive seen is Exodus and that does not have 2fa and only stores some altcoins. Bitcoins growing will depend on Bitcoin becoming more useful and to do that Bitcoin need to start looking to support the altcoin market with high quality wallets. A market grows through currency flowing and having interaction and use. Not by Hodl'ing . Bitcoin cannot do it alone. Think bigger Bitcoin.

I totally don't understand or believe how larger blocksize stops scaling or enables government to be able to shutdown Bitcoin? At 7:50 "The more you increase the blocksize, the more you increase the requirements for the nodes that run those servers and process those transactions and the easier it is for a government to stop your transactions". I think that is a nonsensical statement but if not, please describe the OPTIMUM size that protects against the government stopping a transaction? My own thought is that it would be a random size that would be the least detectable. One that constantly bumps against a ceiiling say at 1 mb, then a governement can look for all 1 mb files. I think Bitcoin Core's constant hitting that ceiling is the more likely to be setting itself up to be interrupted by blocksize, rather than Bitcoin cash?

WOW, Iknew who Dimon was and what he said weeks ago but I didn't know about his regret . That could be really interesting, if someone from JP Morgan says that he believes in blockchain technology. This can have some impact in the market.

On the other hand, I think that the most important problems of BTC are scalability and privacy. Do you think that MAST will work? Is not going to be another fork? My question is, if there are other coins/projects (PIVX, DeepOnion, Dash, Verge,….) that have this problems solved, why don't we use them? (Instead of create a new fork of BTC)